Trade Official 2025-2026 Trade Deadline Thread

[Sugus]

oh you mean the fact that this team cant shoot threes or defend it ? Ya its broke pretty bad in that department and was an easy fix. If Lakers can add 50 percent 3 shooter for peanuts so can we. Brian Wrong wronged again.

Same Brian Wrong that built this 2nd Seed team, tbh? Stay consistent with it...

 

[tearsofmorningdew]

I wonder what santi aldama would’ve cost…

 

[O_V]

the Spurs drafted Primo because they were scared OKC was going to pick him. That's the story Spurs beat writers have been telling for years. They might've got bamboozled by Presti there.

Might have, yes. The Thunder had at least three picks in that draft in the first round. They had one to waste. Spurs beat writers toe the company line or they lose access. Everybody knows that.

And I acknowledge that this is all academic because there wasn't anybody worth a shit in that draft after the Spurs pick.

 

[OK Computer]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2019650611864588443

 

[John B]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2019650611864588443

Those guys better start improving. Sochan, Olynyk, Bismack not even getting any minutes with Kornet out.

 

[Ariel]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2019650611864588443

That's very nice and politically correct, but I wonder if he'll truly feel that if the Spurs get bounced in the first round when with some team packs the paint and all those guys can't make a shot or grab a rebound to save their life.

 

[Sugus]

That's very nice and politically correct, but I wonder if he'll truly feel that if the Spurs get bounced in the first round when with some team packs the paint and all those guys can't make a shot or grab a rebound to save their life.

Of course he won't, and it'll certainly trigger changes. But that's expected on both ends in case of a disappointing 1st rd exit.

There's really no reason for him to feel in a negative way while being the 2nd Seed and hitting last season's total win # before the ASB. Cross the bridge when you get to it...

 

[Ariel]

Of course he won't, and it'll certainly trigger changes. But that's expected on both ends in case of a disappointing 1st rd exit.

There's really no reason for him to feel in a negative way while being the 2nd Seed and hitting last season's total win # before the ASB. Cross the bridge when you get to it...

I'm not claiming Wemby should have said anything else, I'm saying no one should use what he said as evidence what the Spurs did (nothing) was the right call. The goal should be anticipating (and addressing) whatever problems Spurs may have in the playoffs, not having a warm and fuzzy feeling in the locker room for 15' after the trade deadline.

 

[rascal]

Same Brian Wrong that built this 2nd Seed team, tbh? Stay consistent with it...

Lucky lottery balls is what has built this 2nd seed team.

 

[Sugus]

I'm not claiming Wemby should have said anything else, I'm saying no one should use what he said as evidence what the Spurs did (nothing) was the right call. The goal should be anticipating (and addressing) whatever problems Spurs may have in the playoffs, not having a warm and fuzzy feeling in the locker room for 15' after the trade deadline.

I mean, insofar as keeping your superstar happy is the #1 priority of a FO - if Victor says he's on the same page, it was the right call. In the same vein, if Victor is mad at teammates for pissing away the ball in the playoffs and wants them gone, the FO should act accordingly (within reason). So I see your point, but can't agree, given what Wemby explicitly says.

I was personally hoping for a trade though, so I do get where you're coming from. The boat is sure to be rocked in the off-season IMO.

 

[Sugus]

Lucky lottery balls is what has built this 2nd seed team.

Sure - which the Spurs FO very purposefully tanked towards. Weren't you here for the Dejounte and DWhite trades? It's all about timing in this league, just look at the Hawks and their #1 pick.

 

[Ariel]

I mean, insofar as keeping your superstar happy is the #1 priority of a FO - if Victor says he's on the same page, it was the right call. In the same vein, if Victor is mad at teammates for pissing away the ball in the playoffs and wants them gone, the FO should act accordingly (within reason). So I see your point, but can't agree, given what Wemby explicitly says.

I was personally hoping for a trade though, so I do get where you're coming from. The boat is sure to be rocked in the off-season IMO.

I also want Wemby happy... but I want him happy in JUNE, not in FEBRUARY.

 

[scott]

Thinking about it more…

The Spurs decided, after looking at all the option available, they want to roll with rotation we currently have. This is fine. Real game changing moves might have been expense in terms of acquisition cost and they didn’t want to do that.

Could they have made some move at the fringes of the roster that might help in a pinch? Probably… but they decided continuity was more valuable. That’s fine.

What I don’t like, and is generally indisputable: the Spurs did reduce their off-season flexibility by doing nothing. We have covered it in this thread. The Spurs will now enter the offseason with $13.3MM of cap space and the $9.5MM room exception. If they want to make an offseason trade, it will have to fit into the cap space or they’ll be forced to send out a member of their current rotation. They will not have any superfluous salary to send out as matching. That is the real thing they lost by doing nothing at the deadline. Let’s see how it works out.

 

[OK Computer]

If a trade for a role player by the trade deadline is the difference between success and failure in the playoffs, then the team has bigger problems than that.

 

[Mugen]

Sure - which the Spurs FO very purposefully tanked towards. Weren't you here for the Dejounte and DWhite trades? It's all about timing in this league, just look at the Hawks and their #1 pick.

Plenty of teams purposefully tank, year in year out. The difference between those teams and the Spurs is tremendous lottery luck

 

[scott]

If a trade for a role player by the trade deadline is the difference between success and failure in the playoffs, then the team has bigger problems than that.

Have seen various versions of this sentiment, and it’s illogical. Why care at all who your role players are if they won’t make the difference between success and failure in the playoffs? We act like we’re not a franchise who has won titles by virtue of role players coming up big in playoff and finals moments.

If the ball goes to Linton Johnson instead of Robert Horry in Game 5 of the 2005 finals, do we think we still win?

This new found sentiment that role players are irrelevant to the success of your team, and that all that matters is how far your stars carry you, is weird and undermined by history.

Can’t wait until the post-season interview: “Mitch, Harrison Barnes and Devin Vassell combined to go 1-42 from 3 this series… how can Wemby be better next year to counteract that?”

 

[Mugen]

Thinking about it more…

The Spurs decided, after looking at all the option available, they want to roll with rotation we currently have. This is fine. Real game changing moves might have been expense in terms of acquisition cost and they didn’t want to do that.

Could they have made some move at the fringes of the roster that might help in a pinch? Probably… but they decided continuity was more valuable. That’s fine.

What I don’t like, and is generally indisputable: the Spurs did reduce their off-season flexibility by doing nothing. We have covered it in this thread. The Spurs will now enter the offseason with $13.3MM of cap space and the $9.5MM room exception. If they want to make an offseason trade, it will have to fit into the cap space or they’ll be forced to send out a member of their current rotation. They will not have any superfluous salary to send out as matching. That is the real thing they lost by doing nothing at the deadline. Let’s see how it works out.

They've got 27million in salary just begging to be traded this offseason tbh

 

[Ariel]

They've got 27million in salary just begging to be traded this offseason tbh

I doubt the phone will be ringing off the hook with teams interested in Vassell

 

[scott]

They've got 27million in salary just begging to be traded this offseason tbh

They’ll obviously still be able to make moves, but my point is now they’ll HAVE to move (Vassell in this example). Would be better to have flexibility (ideally, contracts on their last deal). The other team may rather have expiring money that Vassell, for example.

For a team that preaches keeping flexibility, having all of this salary roll off as expiring sure does the opposite so it’s a little bit out of character for them.

 

[Raven_]

Have seen various versions of this sentiment, and it’s illogical. Why care at all who your role players are if they won’t make the difference between success and failure in the playoffs? We act like we’re not a franchise who has won titles by virtue of role players coming up big in playoff and finals moments.

If the ball goes to Linton Johnson instead of Robert Horry in Game 5 of the 2005 finals, do we think we still win?

This new found sentiment that role players are irrelevant to the success of your team, and that all that matters is how far your stars carry you, is weird and undermined by history.

Can’t wait until the post-season interview: “Mitch, Harrison Barnes and Devin Vassell combined to go 1-42 from 3 this series… how can Wemby be better next year to counteract that?”

I mean... I agree in spirit, but it is a bit of a fallacy, as we already have a number 2 pick, the heart of the team, our main offseason acquisition and barnes all with 20ish minutes per game on the bench. I haven't seen many teams going 10 deep in the playoffs unless there's injuries.

 

[OK Computer]

Have seen various versions of this sentiment, and it’s illogical. Why care at all who your role players are if they won’t make the difference between success and failure in the playoffs? We act like we’re not a franchise who has won titles by virtue of role players coming up big in playoff and finals moments.

If the ball goes to Linton Johnson instead of Robert Horry in Game 5 of the 2005 finals, do we think we still win?

This new found sentiment that role players are irrelevant to the success of your team, and that all that matters is how far your stars carry you, is weird and undermined by history.

Can’t wait until the post-season interview: “Mitch, Harrison Barnes and Devin Vassell combined to go 1-42 from 3 this series… how can Wemby be better next year to counteract that?”

A trade for a role player **

We have a solid set of role players already.

My post is not to be interpreted as “role players don’t matter”. In the context of the topic at hand, we were talking about trading for a single role player.

 

[OK Computer]

And yes, your stars do matter much more than your role players.

If we want to look at history, we can look at teams where a star had near perfect role players like what Jokic had during his one championship year or Giannis or the Billups led Pistons. What do these teams have in common? They were not able to sustain their dominance. Role players, as you pointed out, can come up big in big moments. But most of the time, that’s all you get. You have lightning-in-a-bottle type standalone championship years. Afterwards, if you aren’t top heavy like the Kobe-Shaq or Warriors teams, you can forget about contending for long periods. Your top players make your role players.

Good role players will save you from time to time - but that’s not a good reason to say… Wemby will be unhappy because we didn’t find the one role player we could’ve traded for at the trade deadline to make that one clutch shot that would’ve helped us move to the next round. If we’re going to rely on a midseason acquisition to take that role player shot vs Keldon or Vassell taking it… we have bigger problems, like I said.

 

[bozhemoi]

That's very nice and politically correct, but I wonder if he'll truly feel that if the Spurs get bounced in the first round when with some team packs the paint and all those guys can't make a shot or grab a rebound to save their life.

Why wouldn't you believe him, lol. He's not some degenerate on a message board only interested in trades like a video game.

This team is having an incredible season. Like, I thought they could potentially get to 50 wins and thought I might be too optimistic. They're a top 3 team in the league right now.

Instead everyone's whining that we didn't get a third string center, when they don't understand what's going on inside the locker room. Instead, recognize what they're doing.

 

[scott]

A trade for a role player **

We have a solid set of role players already.

My post is not to be interpreted as “role players don’t matter”. In the context of the topic at hand, we were talking about trading for a single role player.

Your premise is that if acquiring a role player now makes a difference, then it is a sign of a bigger problem.

What constitutes a "bigger problem" I guess is the question. There are problems we already know about, many of them can attempt to be solved via the acquisition of a role player (and I consider anyone not named Wemby, Fox or Castle to be a role player at this point. Harper is a future star, but right now he is a role player). Some role players could play bit roles (3rd string C) or some could be acquired to play larger roles (displacing some CB or Barnes minutes).

But, let's say we lose a series in 7 games where Kornet had to miss the last two of them with an ankle sprain and we have literally no one to turn to. Wemby still goes for 38/18/6 in 38mpg in those games, but we lose the non-Wemby minutes by 15 points. What bigger problem was revealed there? The problem is obvious - we don't have any depth at 3rd string C. We are well aware of this right now, and could have done something about it, but didn't. This is a quite plausible

We can think of a myriad of these scenarios. But if these roles on the team don't make a difference between winning and losing in the playoffs - then we shouldn't worry about them at all. We should just have the last 5 roster spots be awarded to long-time season ticket holders as a thank you for their patronage. Of course they matter.

To me, this is all indicative of one of the last frontiers for this FO to fine tune their skills: optimization of the fringes. Maximizing every single roster spot, including the two ways. Optimizing expiring contracts to provide maximum flexibility in the future. No wasted motion, no wasted activity, maximum economy of our resources. Right now we're not there... (and to be clear, no team has ever reached the optimal state, they can only approach it getting infinitesimally closer), and in the end it's okay... but I hope we do improve in these areas over time.

 

[scott]

And yes, your stars do matter much more than your role players.

If we want to look at history, we can look at teams where a star had near perfect role players like what Jokic had during his one championship year or Giannis or the Billups led Pistons. What do these teams have in common? They were not able to sustain their dominance. Role players, as you pointed out, can come up big in big moments. But most of the time, that’s all you get. You have lightning-in-a-bottle type standalone championship years. Afterwards, if you aren’t top heavy like the Kobe-Shaq or Warriors teams, you can forget about contending for long periods. Your top players make your role players.

Good role players will save you from time to time - but that’s not a good reason to say… Wemby will be unhappy because we didn’t find the one role player we could’ve traded for at the trade deadline to make that one clutch shot that would’ve helped us move to the next round. If we’re going to rely on a midseason acquisition to take that role player shot vs Keldon or Vassell taking it… we have bigger problems, like I said.

Obviously stars matter more than role players... that's why they are stars. If Bobby Horry could have those big moments all the time, he wouldn't have been a role player, he would have been a star.

It's interesting that you mention Jokic and Giannis, because what happened after they won their championship that caused them to not be able to sustain their dominance? Their role players left! Even as great as Jokic and Giannis are, not even they could carry their teams on their back alone. The Spurs sustained excellence for so long because they continually replenished their ranks of role players.

As for the Wemby happiness, that is someone else's argument., not mine. I'm 100% confident that he is 100% focused on winning right now and is bought in to whatever plan the Spurs have. The Spurs are having a great year and he's being allowed to compete at the highest levels. I have no reason to believe Wemby is anything other than happy about where we are right.

As for the last sentence you wrote that I bolded... if we're talking about a different role player in the place of Vassell or Keldon (as an example)... how do we have bigger problems, other than the role players? I'm not understanding how role players faltering means we have bigger problems than those role players? Our stars can't take every shot, the role players need to... play their roles.